>linuxtv at zacglen.com.au wrote:
>>>linuxtv at zacglen.com.au wrote:
>>>>>>> There seem to be quite a few problems getting TwinHan VP1030 etc
>>>> Conditional Access Module working properly.
>>>>>>>> The LinuxTV wiki says they dont work (mostly) and so do various
>>>> other application writers (eg. mythtv, videolan, etc).
>>>>>>> The information on the Wiki is a bit outdated. Both the applications you
>>> mentioned do have support.
>>>>>>> Ahem ... they may have support, but the applications do/did *not* work
>> properly with my irdeto CAM.
>>>> I know this because of the extensive patching that was required to
>> make them work!
>>>>>>It does work for me, many people are using it successfully. FYI, I am
>using an Irdeto module
>For others too it seems to work okay with other applications too as well
>as ca_zap. Search for a thread like this..
>>[linux-dvb] Re: High level CI support in MythTV
>>Regarding Videolan, the relevant person who added support may comment.
Are you sure you are using a TwinHan VP1030A and not some other card?
Very definitely did not work for me.
I can run original ca_zap and it doesn't work.
I can run modified ca_zap and it does work.
What am I to make of your comment?
>>>> Somebody should update the info on the Wiki in regards to the relevant
>>> status.
>>>>>> Regarding MythTV, http://threebit.net/mail-archive/mythtv-dev/msg01711.html>>>>>>>>>> But I don't have any compile problems and I haven't applied a patch
>> multiple times ... what exactly is the revelance?
>>>>[..]
>>Explained above
>
Really? You link only relates to somebody having a problem
compiling a kernel module because he applied patch twice.
How is that relevant, and how does "Explained above" explain the relevance?